PowerTab also displays score and tab, but only displays one instrument at a time. So you can use it, but you'll have to learn right and left hand parts separately.

I've listened to the piano tribute several times, and I'm fairly sure that guy used multiple tracks - he didn't play all that stuff at once, with only two hands and one piano. I admit I could be wrong - a great pianist can give the illusion of sounding like multiple pianos. But there are some parts where I could swear I'm hearing the exact same note twice at the same time, once as part of a guitar transcription and also as part of a vocal line.

PowerTab also displays score and tab, but only displays one instrument at a time. So you can use it, but you'll have to learn right and left hand parts separately.

I've listened to the piano tribute several times, and I'm fairly sure that guy used multiple tracks - he didn't play all that stuff at once, with only two hands and one piano. I admit I could be wrong - a great pianist can give the illusion of sounding like multiple pianos. But there are some parts where I could swear I'm hearing the exact same note twice at the same time, once as part of a guitar transcription and also as part of a vocal line.

Click to expand...

That's the problem - you'd have to learn both hands seperately.

I'm also not a pianist, but I really doubt he played all that with just two hands.

PowerTab also displays score and tab, but only displays one instrument at a time. So you can use it, but you'll have to learn right and left hand parts separately.

I've listened to the piano tribute several times, and I'm fairly sure that guy used multiple tracks - he didn't play all that stuff at once, with only two hands and one piano. I admit I could be wrong - a great pianist can give the illusion of sounding like multiple pianos. But there are some parts where I could swear I'm hearing the exact same note twice at the same time, once as part of a guitar transcription and also as part of a vocal line.

Click to expand...

He used multiple pianos. The vocal line and rhythm/lead (where there is a single rhytm/lead line) may have been done on one piano, or the bass and vocals, but there's definitely more than one piano there. If you want to learn to play it, though, you don't need vocals, and bass isn't entirely essential. And besides, most guitarists (I for one) will use whichever leads or rhythms are most prominent when playing by myself-you can just learn the main guitar sections for each song, and maybe a few of the harmonies-for myself, working out harmonies is much easier on piano than guitar (most of it is just dropped a 3rd or a 5th or an octave, anyway), but that's probably cos I'm new to guitar...

He used multiple pianos. The vocal line and rhythm/lead (where there is a single rhytm/lead line) may have been done on one piano, or the bass and vocals, but there's definitely more than one piano there. If you want to learn to play it, though, you don't need vocals, and bass isn't entirely essential. And besides, most guitarists (I for one) will use whichever leads or rhythms are most prominent when playing by myself-you can just learn the main guitar sections for each song, and maybe a few of the harmonies-for myself, working out harmonies is much easier on piano than guitar (most of it is just dropped a 3rd or a 5th or an octave, anyway), but that's probably cos I'm new to guitar...

Click to expand...

I disagree with some of those statements. For starters, the bass is essential, especially for bass-heavy songs like Iron Maiden. However, I think that basslines, when translated to piano, sound better when played in a piano-like idiom. Rapid repetition of the same note sounds good on an electric bass, but doesn't work as well on piano. In fact, it's one of the things that I don't like about the piano tribute album. While it's not exactly disastarous, it could have been done better. For example, rolling octaves sound great on piano.

(Useless interjection: do you have any idea how hard it is to write a coherent post while listening to Frank Zappa? The man was brilliant, and his music virtually demands close attention.)

Rolling octaves is a technique where the pianist takes two notes one octave apart and alternates between them at high speed. When done well, it sounds almost like thunder. One of the greatest examples in the piano repertoire is the first movement of Beethoven's Pathetique Sonata - listen to the moment about one minute when the tempo changes from slow to fast. When I mess around on piano and play rock songs, I often use rolling octaves to make the bass more interesting.

Another option is Alberti bass. This can be done cheesily, making it sound like a bad Mozart imitation, but with care it can also be done well. However, because it is so closely associated with classical music, it should only be used sparingly in rock. One prominent example can be found in a Billy Joel song, "Scenes From An Italian Restaurant": listen at about the 6:12 point, just before the reprise of the opening lyrics.

(And before you knock Billy Joel as lousy music, he was a great piano player and songwriter back in the 70s, when that song was recorded. In fact, it's easily his best song in my opinion.)

As for saying the lead vocal melody doesn't need to be played - that depends upon the intention of the player. If I were aiming for a pure piano version of any song (that is, with no singer) I would consider the vocal melody to be mandatory. With a lot of rock songs (including Maiden), take away that melody and all you've got is a repeating riff which can get boring.

In my opinion, working out harmonies is actually much harder on piano than guitar. The construction of a guitar lends itself to easily learning to play specific intervals from any position. If you know how to play an A major scale in the fifth position, then you also know C major - just move the exact same finger positions up three frets. On piano, every scale has a distinct "shape" and requires different fingerings. In other words, I can easily play a major sixth above any given note on the guitar just by knowing a fingering without knowing the scale. On piano, I have to know the scale first, and then determine the fingering. This may admittedly be easy for experienced piano players, but it's much harder if you're coming from a guitar-based background.

In short*, I don't consider it to be a handicap to learn right and left hand parts separately and then combine them. For one thing, that's the way I've always learned piano pieces. Secondly, looking at them separately allows me to modify them more easily if I want to have an arrangement that sounds like it's built for piano in the first place. Overall, that was my major source of disappointment in the piano tribute album. The musician who did it followed Maiden too slavishly. He should have put more originality into his arrangements.

In fact, that's my biggest complaint about most covers. Sure, it's amusing if you can cover a song note-for-note. But why do it, unless amusement is all you're after? I'm not saying amusement is bad - playing a perfect cover is fun for the band doing it, but that's about all. I'm much more interested in covers which substantially alter the original version. For example, on Dream Theater's cover of the Number Of The Beast album, the only song which really interested me was Gangland. Or with my own band, the covers which I find most fun are the ones which we put our own stamp on - such as our death-metal-style version of "Tainted Love", or our reggae/blues version of "Purple Rain".

*Too damn late. I abandoned the concept of a "short post" several paragraphs before this. In fact, at this very moment, I'm disappointed that I've run out of things to say. I've got another 15 minutes before I have to leave, and I was hoping to fill all this time with writing one post of unholy length - what us oldtimers sometimes call Loose-Cannon-long. Although, given the trends I've observed on this board in recent months, perhaps our standard for excessive verbosity should be referred to as Iron-Duke-long. That guy can really get on a roll when he's in the right mood. It's probably all that higher education. I bet his posts would be shorter if he wasn't accustomed to writing dissertations and those kind of things. It's a problem that all historians have - they just don't know when to shut up. I mean, right now I'm reading this book about the history of the US Civil War, and I'm up to page 700, and the author hasn't even gotten around to Gettysburg yet! That author should get to the point. After all, Gettysburg is the only thing normal people care about. That's why Iced Earth did those songs. If all the rest of it was so interesting, how come Iced Earth didn't write a song called "Antietam"? I bet it's because there aren't many interesting words that rhyme with Antietam. Ham, ram, spam and of course damn. But in these modern days, the word "damn" just doesn't have sufficient shock value anymore. In fact, I don't know if any words at all really shock anyone. Certainly "fuck" doesn't, and it's supposedly one of the worst of them all. What we need is some new curse words. Someone needs to invent a word that sounds like nonsense, and then we all need to agree on a disgusting, perverted, repugnant meaning for it. But are there any unnamed perversions left out there? Since the advent of the internet, every perversion imaginable has been given a website and a name. You kids today have it easy. I remember when I was a kid, if we wanted midget porn, we had to hike thirty miles in hip-deep snow, uphill both ways. And when we got to the midget porn store, we were lucky if they weren't sold out and we had to settle for clown porn. And anyone who has ever compared the two knows that midget porn is infinitely better than clown porn. I mean, the clowns have to dress up to look that way, but the midgets have their strangeness built right in. But now, if you kids want midget porn, all you gotta do is Google for it. This culture of getting what you want when you want it isn't healthy for rock and roll. Rock music is supposed to be about dissatisfaction. That's why the Stones song is such a classic. That's why the Twisted Sister song "I Wanna Rock" is so great - it implies that rocking is actually a struggle**. Which of course it is, if you do it right. Easy isn't good. You gotta be able to hear the blood and sweat and tears and effort and pain in the music before the music is great. That's why cover versions ought to be different from the originial. Just learning the original arrangement takes no brains. To make an analogy with cooking, it's like a home-cooked meal which requires hours of preparation vs. McDonalds. Learn the cover note-for-note, and all you're feeding to your listeners is the musical equivalent of a chicken mcnugget. It causes your listeners to develop unhealthy tastes in music. This is the primary reason why rap music is almost always bad. All they know how to do is sample old songs. That's why rap music is fated to fade away to nothing some day - eventually, they'll run out of songs to sample. And since they don't know how to write their own grooves, they'll drown in a stinking pool of their overwhelming ignorance. I'm not speaking out of prejuidice here (in the literal sense of pre-judging). I've listened to a lot of rap in my time. And 98% of it is sampled crap. Most rappers are music's equivalent of Cro-Magnon Man - temporarily successful, but on an evolutionary dead-end. And like anything else in this world, music which fails to evolve is fated to die. Oh shit, I just noticed I was supposed to be out of here ten minutes ago.

**Actually, upon further review of the lyrics to said Twisted Sister song, I found that the lyrics don't completely support my claim above. Only the first verse implies that someone is trying to stop the protagonist from rocking; and even then, the protagonist simply answers firmly in the negative and rocks anyway. So it would seem that this song wasn't a very good one to support my thesis. In fact, if anything, it supports the antithesis, in that the immediate negation of the antagonist by the protagonist suggests a protagonist who is not willing to work and struggle, but rather demands what he wants, when he wants it (in this case, the want being "to rock"). Why then did this song come into my brain when I was writing the above? Maybe it's just because I'm a big fan of Twisted Sister and I think Dee Snider's lyrics are great. Juvenile to be sure, but great nonetheless. Or maybe I just think that because I myself was a juvenile when I first heard Twisted Sister. It's strange how nostalgia can color one's memories. One's state of mind at the time a memory is formed has a huge effect on the factual accuracy of the memory. For example, I used to work at a bakery that was about a fifteen-minute drive from my apartment. But back in those days, I was smoking marijuana all the time - from the moment I woke up in the morning to the time I passed out at night***. So my memory of how to get to work was affected by drug use, and only worked when I was using drugs. I visited that town a couple years after I quit drugs, and tried to drive to that bakery. I got lost! A place I drove to every day for months on end, and I couldn't find it with a clean brain. There's a moral to this story somewhere. Is it "don't use drugs"? Nah. Don't ever work in a bakery!

***That's a reference to a fact that most people don't know about hardcore drug addicts and alcoholics. We don't really "go to sleep" and "wake up" like a normal person. We just pass out and come to. The goal is to push your body's ability to handle weird chemicals to the breaking point, then break it, then pass out until you can do it again and again and again and again. It's a monotonous life, but we try to convince ourselves otherwise by saying that we're "partying". But it's not a party. Real partying involves socializing with other people, and hardcore addicts don't do that. Their social circle gets smaller and smaller, eventually consisting of nothing but other addicts and drug dealers. Part of the reason for this is that normal people don't like hanging out with hardcore addicts, who tend to destroy the lives of everyone they know. But a more interesting part is that addicts like to be around those whose addiction is even worse than their own. That way, they can point at the other guy and say, "See, I'm not so bad. I'm not as bad as him!" Not surprisingly, many addicts won't even consider stopping until they get so bad that they can't find anyone worse than themselves to point to. You may have heard of the excessive drug abuse engaged in by the Toxic Twins: Steven Tyler and Joe Perry of Aerosmith****. When I first joined Alcoholics Anonymous, I met a guy from Boston who had been so bad that he was the guy who Joe Perry pointed to and said, "At least I'm not as bad as him!" Now that's an impressive level of drug abuse.

****Aerosmith is an interesting band name, from a linguistic perspective. It begins with two vowels. Off the top of my head, the only other bands who also meet that criteria are Audioslave and the Eagles - assuming that you don't count the "the" as part of the band name. That's a debatable point. I mean, if you're ever unlucky enough to be subjected to hearing an Eagles song on the radio*****, they never say "That was Eagles..." - they always say "That was THE Eagles." It seems some form of article is necessary. I'm also intrigued by case where an unnecessary article is inserted. For example, I've seen old rock posters where Pink Floyd advertised themselves as "The Pink Floyd". Where the hell did that "the" come from? But somehow it makes the band name more exotic. I used to play in a bar band which tried that trick. Our name was Cosmic Fate, but for one gig we advertised ourselves as "The Cosmic Fate". We used to play a lot of Ozzy-era Sabbath songs. My favorite was always "Hand Of Doom", which is easily the most underrated song on the Paranoid album. A beautiful ternary structure: slow, fast, slow. Just like a lot of Maiden songs. Tempo changes rock. They make any music more interesting. That's why piano players love the Pathetique sonata's first movement - it goes from slow as molasses in January to faster than a frog in a blender.

*****Speaking of radio, I was looking around at random Iron-Maiden-related journal entries on last.fm, and I saw one where a person said they recently discovered Maiden because they heard "Hallowed Be Thy Name" on the radio. Makes me wonder where that person is from, because I've never found a radio station that would touch that song with a ten-foot pole. But if it's happening, maybe there's hope yet for popular music. Not much, but some.

******I don't actually have anything more to say. I just wanted to see how small I can make the typeface before it becomes entirely unreadable. But why should I need something to say before I post? That hasn't stopped me yet, at least not in this post. However, I usually don't take that sort of attitude onto this forum. That's why my post count is fairly low, for someone who's been here for over 3 years that is. I don't usually say anything, unless I think I've got something interesting or important to say. It actually takes a great deal of effort for me to spam this forum. I sometimes wish more people had that characteristic. But then again, maybe a world full of thoughtful people would be less interesting. So therefore, I advise everyone - spam away! And if I, as a moderator, ever reprimand you for it, don't try to bring up this post as a defense. I'll long since have forgotten about it. You err, I apply discipline. That's the way it goes around here. ... No, wait, that isn't the way. I haven't disciplined anyone in a while. Perun does that nowadays. You err, The Holy Inquisitor applies discipline. I only stir the pot.

Firstly, it depends, as you said, on the intention of the pianist. If he is intending to give a full performance by himself, then, yes, he needs to know all parts of the song. However, the difference between playing just for yourself and playing professionally will dictate what you should learn. The bare bones of it is that the most prominent instrument in a particular song is what a person will want to learn.

As for bass, I do see your point about Maiden's music. I'm also familiar with both the Pathetique (I believe it's also known as a 'tremolo' bass...and it makes that movement bloody hard to play!) and the Alberti. I don't think the Alberti fits in well with Maiden's sound, though. If you're just messing around, though, I don't believe the bass to be necessary...again, if you're playing it professionally, then it may be required, or at least some bass. But since a lot of bass playing (and quite a bit of Maiden's) is just whatever the guitar riff is (be it power chords or otherwise) transposed on the bass, it doesn't make a huge difference in learning the song...you can improvise your own bass for some songs like this (mostly from the later half of Maiden's career).

For example, I learnt (or was learning, until my dad lost the sheet music ¬_¬) the piano intro to Something Wicked: The Coming Curse by Iced Earth. I learnt the right hand, but had only just started on the left part...in this case, the left hand adds texture, but except for a few bars, it isn't missed by its absence, especially since my friend (who takes the lead on all guitar stuff we play) and I simply play for enjoyment (forthe minute at least).

As for vocals, again, it depends on your requirements. I don't sing when I'm playing guitar (because I can't ), but I sing the lyrics in my head. If you're going for the full experience, then I would agree that a vocal line is pretty much necessary to play the full song.

As for the harmonies thing, I've just found it easier to work out Maiden riffs on piano, but that may just be because I've played piano for a while...you can second guess the pattern the riff will take, is what I mean.

Incidentally, SMX, I didn't know you played piano. How long have you been playing? (Probably longer than me! )

I've been playing piano since 1980 - I guess that makes it 26 years now. But ever since I switched my main instrument to bass in 1986, I haven't played nearly as much as I did before then.

And for the record - I've also been playing drums since 1981 and guitar since 1985.

Click to expand...

Blimey. Must get myself a keyboard whenever I go off to uni, then, so I can keep up my piano. I'll be focussing on my guitar once I finish Grade 8, but it's always been my dream to try and get Sonata Pathetique nailed. Unfortunately, when I subtly hinted to my piano teacher that I wanted to try the first movement (She had been teaching me it for a while, I did a bit more over the summer, and she asked if I had done any more), she said, 'Oh, well the first movement is very hard, let's see if you've got the cantabile movement any further.'

That said, the cantabile is a great piece as well, but I'll try and suggest to her again about learning the first movement...I know the notes, but since I'm such an impatient bastard, I've rushed it up to speed, and I want to get it right...it seems to be the hardest of the movements, as the rondo is the only one I haven't looked at, and it doesn't look exceptionally difficult...

I used to be able to play the first and second movements of the Pathetique, many years ago. Never got around to learning the third. The first movement is indeed hard, but doable. It took me a couple months of practicing it every day for an hour (sometimes two) before I had it down.

I used to be able to play the first and second movements of the Pathetique, many years ago. Never got around to learning the third. The first movement is indeed hard, but doable. It took me a couple months of practicing it every day for an hour (sometimes two) before I had it down.

Click to expand...

I can get it down, at least up to the first 'Tempo I' transition (I'm learning the rest), it's just getting it accurately up to speed that's the problem...it takes a lot of patience. Still, it is a fantastic piece of music. I particularly like the way, after the furious counterpoint of the ascending/descending octaves around the 5th page or so, he leaves a slight rest with a little bridge ditty, before launching into a ridiculous cadenza. It's like Yngwie J. Malmsteen, only not boring.

I've heard some versions of that movement where it's played at a stupidly, ridiculously fast speed. I think some pianists play it as fast as possible just for the sake of speed. I never had it up to those ludicrous tempos. I think that piece (along with many other "fast" pieces) are actually better when slowed down just a bit, so you can clearly hear the individual notes. I think I was in the range of about 220 bpm, but I've heard versions that had to be at least 300.

I do remember that when I got it up to that speed, I was playing almost entirely by touch i.e. rarely looking at my hands. If I watched my own hands, I would screw up. The only thing I looked at was when I had to make big jumps in range, like the second theme where the hands cross. (Which, incidentally, was also the hardest part for me to get down.)

I've heard some versions of that movement where it's played at a stupidly, ridiculously fast speed. I think some pianists play it as fast as possible just for the sake of speed. I never had it up to those ludicrous tempos. I think that piece (along with many other "fast" pieces) are actually better when slowed down just a bit, so you can clearly hear the individual notes. I think I was in the range of about 220 bpm, but I've heard versions that had to be at least 300.

I do remember that when I got it up to that speed, I was playing almost entirely by touch i.e. rarely looking at my hands. If I watched my own hands, I would screw up. The only thing I looked at was when I had to make big jumps in range, like the second theme where the hands cross. (Which, incidentally, was also the hardest part for me to get down.)

Click to expand...

I know what you mean about playing by touch...but I actually find the cross-handed theme relatively easy to get down, but then again, I don't do it at full speed. I find the final crescendo before the cadenza (I think you know the one) very hard to get consistently right; some days I hit it on the head and feel really good (you get such an adrenaline surge doing it right at a fast speed)...other days I can't do it at all.

And yes, I did sit through 4 versions of this piece on GooTube/Yougle to find this one, it is one of the best ones on there.
With the exception of skipping the repeat of the exposition (a crime), this guy gets it right - he doesn't rush through the Grave, he takes the Allegro slow enough to hear all the individual notes, and he remembers the dynamics.

And yes, I did sit through 4 versions of this piece on GooTube/Yougle to find this one, it is one of the best ones on there.
With the exception of skipping the repeat of the exposition (a crime), this guy gets it right - he doesn't rush through the Grave, he takes the Allegro slow enough to hear all the individual notes, and he remembers the dynamics.

Click to expand...

That truly is a good performance of the Pathetique. He gets the right amount of individual expression into the Grave (I like the way he takes the sforzandos very heavy, and the huge ranges of tempo changes he puts in). As for the allegro...perfect. There's not a whole lot you can do with it, except play it fast, consistent and correct (although there is some oppurtunity for tempo/dynamic variations from the part of the musician, particularly before the cadenza). Odin approves!

Aside from the fact that I have been seeking the Coming Cursed sheet music for years in addition to many other songs (Piano Man, Watching Over Me, Root Beer Rag, Moral Centralia, etc) I suppose this post is irrelevant.

Anyone who labels Billy Joel as anything less than a superb musician and songwriter is a complete moron and has absolutely no right whatsoever to hold nor share their musical opinion with anyone. My friends are all death metal fans that listen to music I have no respect for like Cannibal Corpse or Proto Men to name a few, but there's one thing we agree on with no debate. Billy Joel has always been and will always continue to be a source of inspiration and musical genius for the generations that are here to experience him. I should hope we can get the youngins that come after us to feel the same way.

Anyone who labels Billy Joel as anything less than a superb musician and songwriter is a complete moron and has absolutely no right whatsoever to hold nor share their musical opinion with anyone.

Click to expand...

Bronco Billy’s Ranch Grill & Saloon keeps the Old West alive and well in Sisters, Oregon.
Housed in the historic Hotel Sisters, Bronco Billy’s is a must see for Billy Joel fanatatics.

We offer casual family dining surrounded by rugged Western décor. You’ll step back in time to the days of sarsaparillas, rodeos, and cattle drives.

Upstairs, the old hotel rooms have been renovated into private dining rooms, each with its own theme. We also have a covered deck open during the summer for large parties, weddings, and most importantly: Billy Joel concerts.
From small intimate parties to groups of up to 100, we can accommodate your special occasion.

Anyone who labels Billy Joel as anything less than a superb musician and songwriter is a complete moron and has absolutely no right whatsoever to be welcome in our premises.

Anyone who labels Billy Joel as anything less than a superb musician and songwriter is a complete moron and has absolutely no right whatsoever to hold nor share their musical opinion with anyone.

Click to expand...

It's entirely ridiculous to state that your opinion must be held by all other people, especially when that opinion reflects complete worship of any artist. We don't even treat Maiden that way here; we frequently debate their flaws. In fact, we probably talk about their flaws more than their greatness, because that's where all the interesting discussion is to be found. Endless threads of "OMG Hallowed roxxors!" would bore the hell out of us quickly.

For the record, no one knocked Billy Joel in this thread. I made a passing mention of one of his songs, and noted that he was once very good. I say "once" because I haven't like anything he did since the An Innocent Man album. Even a lot of his 70s songs I find horrible. I heard "It's Still Rock And Roll To Me" on the radio today, and that's a prime example of a horrid song.

If you disagree with my opinion, that's your business. If you care to discuss the matter intelligently, I'm game. But if you want to call anybody a moron just because they disagree with you, you're on the wrong forum.

By coincidence, I'm listening to Billy Joel right now - it came up randomly on my Winamp. (Specifically: the song "Rosalinda's Eyes" from his 1978 album 52nd Street.)

I suspect Grenadeh is a Billy Joel fanatic who found this thread via Google and decided to comment. Otherwise, it would be quite odd for a new member to suddenly bump an old thread like this as his very first post.